How comfortable does a gun have to be?

This thread is the product of some YouTubing and reading on some forums and other sites where people were complaining about the Glock 27. The main complaint I heard was that the grip is too short, it's hard to control, and the bottom of the grip frame was bulged out too much. My question is how much does that matter to you? I'm not harping, and I'm not mad at anyone for having a different opinion, but my Glock 27 is a concealed carry weapon and I believe it was designed with that in mind. All of the above complaints and more would be perfectly applicable if you were shooting at a shooting match or plinking for fun, but with a carry weapon, isn't it better to make a few ergonomic sacrifices for a supremely concealable weapon? It certainly seems to me that it would be better to carry a small gun that can be a bit uncomfortable to shoot rather than a tiny gun that is comfortable to shoot (like the Taurus PT-22, for example) or simply have no gun at all!
I guess I'm just griping, but is there anyone else out there who gets tired of hearing people complain about compromises designed to make a weapon better for a particular purpose? I don't complain about a Glock 35 being hard to conceal because it's designed with competition in mind, and I think it's a bit unfair to complain about the two-fingered grip and such on a sub-compact concealed carry weapon. Thanks to all who took the time to read my rant, and I'd love to hear some thoughts, supporting comments, and objections!!
By the way, I carry my Glock 27 in a Comp-Tac MTAC holster and I would HIGHLY recommend this to anyone looking into an IWB-style holster. It's very easy to tuck a shirt in, but it's completely comfortable to draw from no matter how you wear it. Happy shooting!

It's all a tradeoff...

...comfort for utility...I'd rather have some weight and even a bit of discomfort than to be undergunned...and it's part of the commitment...I go to work when it's cold and rainy...or hot and muggy...so I carry what I feel I need or might need rather than something that would not likely serve my needs...and I am surprised at what others carry on both the small and light end and the big an heavy end...but it's their choices and decisions...why should I carp at them about them? I'm just glad that they do carry...

You carry what you can shoot well and if you can't shoot it well, then it matters not that it's comfortable to conceal, or that it's the latest model, or that it had a good price. I once read a comment in which the fellow said that an empty pistol is a rock that's too expensive to throw and a sword that's too short to cut anybody with. I feel the same way about a defensive gun that one cannot shoot well. Shootability comes first with me always and compromises in handling and ergonomics made to facilitate concealment isn't something I can embrace if those compromises affect shootability. It would be hard for me to criticize others for having personal preferences, however, since I have carried and successfully concealed full size service automatic pistols most of my adult life. You don't get much her off the norm than that these days it seems.

I suppose that is why so many weapons are available to the populous - everyone has their likes and dislikes about a weapon.

I have a G23 and tried the G27 before purchasing my Sig P239. I carry both the of those guns and personally did not like the short grip of the G27. Not saying it is a bad weapon - it just didn't appeal to me.

If it works for you then go for it. That's why you hear so much on other threads to try the weapon before you buy it. Good advice. Perhaps the people complaining about the G27 shelled out $500 for it and didn't like it after they bought it.

Good thread and a good question. As others have said, each person has different criteria for a carry weapon, and there is no accounting for other people's tastes.

I make a lot of concessions during the hot Texas summers, in order to keep carrying every day. My rule is to carry the biggest handgun I can conceal properly, but at work, during summertime, it has to be deep concealment. My company has a 'don't ask-don't tell' approach to carrying concealed. Management is pro-gun, for the most part, but they just don't want the issue to ever come up, so those of us who carry don't ever want to let the uninitiated know that we are carrying.

That translates into my having to carry small guns during warm weather, when a cover garment would look out of character for me, so I have finally resigned myself to an LCP with a CT laser sight. I have large hands, so this a major adjustment for me, and the gun is much more uncomfortable for me to practice with than it is for someone whose hand it actually fits, because the recoil is sufficient to cause the trigger guard to bang my fingers up a little. But I have practiced with it, nevertheless, and with the addition of the CT 'grips,' I can shoot paper plates, out to about 10-15 yards.

I don't gripe about it, because the little gun does exactly what it was designed to do, and I knew it was going to require a modified shooting technique, from the beginning. Given the choice, I'll carry my 1911 or XD45, or a small 9mm, but I will always carry something.

I live in the Deep South of the USA where shorts and T-shirts are the norm for about 7-8 months out of the year. I carried an LCP in a DeSantis Nemesis in R front pocket until a couple of months ago when I acquired a Kahr PM9 w/CT that rides in R front pocket now in it's DeSantis. No complaints with the LCP. I just started feeling undergunned with the .380 cal. vs 9mm. The PM9 is a bit heavier but still does fine and I forget it's there and, to my knowledge, no one is the wiser that I'm carrying.

I am considering the Glock 19 in an IWB holster for cooler weather carry when I wear a jacket or coat.

On feeling undergunned, one writer felt that way with a 380 so is now carrying a 9. I feel that way about 9s and I carry a 40.

I CC with a bellybag, so my pistol doesn't have to be tiny. I've shot a 27, VERY poorly because it's just too small for my medium-large hands. I bought a 23 because it felt lots better and good enough for ME to shoot it well. It feels LOTS better with a Pierce magazine extender...
...that allows all-3 of my fingers to grip it.

The 1st Glock I owned was a new 35, and I've carried it in the size-large Tommy's bellybag. But then I got that 23 feeling and shooting well.

I don't carry IWB or OWB or in any pocket because I hate things hanging on my waistband and always dragging my pants down, and I also hate to wear belts, but snapping on that bellybag several times a day is easy and comfortable.

Each of us should use/shoot/carry what's appropriate for them. I'm quite happy with my stuff, and I hope all of you, too, are.

My opinion is what good is a concealed carry gun if you don't carry it. Having said that, if it's too large (more comfortable to shoot) you will probably be less likely to carry it. Therefore less likely to have it when you need it.

Small guns can be shot well with practice. The Glock 27/26 can be shot well and are generally not uncomfortable. Also, you can use the magazine extensions and it's still easier to conceal than a G19/23. Feels more like a larger gun with the mag extensions.

Bottom line, sacrifice the shootability for the portability and practice a lot.

A weapon for me has to be comfortable to shoot. t least in my shooting experiences the comfort level as a direct correlation to my ability to be on target consistently. It's a major concern when I'm buying a weapon for any use. For me a weapon has to feel like it's part of me when it's holstered as well as in my hand. That's the reason many of us look for the right rig to hold it to us and it's why we pick one weapon over another, one holster over another etc. Thing is for some what feels "right" wont for another.that's why there are so many flavors out there to choose from in handguns as well as the things we have to choose from to keep them on our person.

The right weapon in the right holster held up with the right belt and all is right with the world. Why to they make things like the Handall slip on grip for Glocks and the like? Because it will feel better. Same for extended floor plates, grip panels for those weapons that can use them. Glocks always seemed a little too clunky in my hands so I don't look to them when I'm looking for a carry weapon. A Sig Sauer feels much better. A 1911 feels even better than that, for me. So I don't own a Glock. I have owned them, there is no denying their quality. But I'll not shoot one near as well as someone that the weapon feel more at home with.

to me comfort is most important when it comes to carrying your hand gun.comfort in carrying = carrying more often then not.
if I can get a finger on the trigger and a round in the chamber we're good to go .

In my first reply to this thread, I was thinking about the comfort I am willing to sacrifice in shooting pleasure, for the comfort I gain in carrying, which is considerable during the hotter months.

Now that cooler weather has finally arrived in Texas, I am able to comfortably carry any one of about a dozen handguns. Lately, I am partial to my CZ RAMI, carried OWB in a home-made pancake style holster, that I designed to ride high on my hip, with a fairly radical forward tilt. I wore this rig for over 12 hours, yesterday, with a spare 14 round mag in a pocket knife pouch on my belt, and it was surprisingly comfortable throughout that time. This consisted of about 7 hours of driving and 5 hours of sitting, standing, and walking. I had a roomy, heavy, khaki type shirt as a cover garment, worn outside, with a T-shirt and blue jeans, assisted by Perry-type suspenders that clip onto my heavy duty leather belt.

I am really pleased with this load-out, because it is comfortable, and I shoot the CZ RAMI very well. Even tough it is roughly the size of a G26 or XD subcompact, I am still able to empty all of the 10+1 rounds into a paper plate, at 25 yards. My old eyes don't permit me to bear down much more than that, out past 10-15 yards, but I can still wear out a 12" disk pretty good, at anything less than 25 yards, and the closer it is, the faster I can shoot. It's a very good carry setup, and I am quite confident with it.

All very good points and I pretty much agree with all of you to some extent. Another thing I was thinking about is the accuracy of a carry weapon. I totally agree that one should be proficient with his weapon and I also understand that there is a great reduction in fine motor skills when under stress but how much accuracy do you need from a carry gun? From what I know most incidents occur within 10 yards or so. Much more than that and I think you will have a hard time convincing the jury it was self defense right? I practice shooting as far out as I can but I don't think it's very fair to pick on a subcompact style gun because it can't produce an inch group at 50 yards. Of course I an exagerating and I mean to offend no one. I really enjoy reading every ones personal take on things because I have only one view point and many of you are much wiser and more experienced than I am with this tyoe of thing. Thanks to all for the replies!

True, I suppose. But I subscribe to the 'aim small-miss small' school of thought. If you spend a little time learning to hit small targets, far out, and do it quickly and smoothly, you will also improve your speed and accuracy up close.

We all have to do what pleases us, and try to make it fit the various self-defense scenarios, else we won't practice as much as we should.